This translation was
crowd-sourced with the help of @DUVFree, BCK, BM, and other
anonymous volunteers. Thanks for your
contribution!

Note: links inserted in brackets have been added by WLPress for reference

Declaration by the Government of the
Republic of Ecuador on Julian Assange’s asylum application

On June 19, 2012, the Australian national Mr.
Julian Assange appeared at the premises of the Ecuadorian
Embassy in London to request that the Ecuadorean State
provide him with diplomatic protection, thus invoking the
existing Diplomatic Asylum rules. The applicant had made his
asylum request based on his fear of eventual political
persecution by a third country, the same country whom could
use his extradition to the Kingdom of Sweden to enable an
expedited subsequent extradition.

The Government of
Ecuador, faithful to the asylum procedures and with the
utmost attention to this case, has reviewed and evaluated
all aspects of this case, particularly the arguments
presented by Mr. Assange to support the fear he feels
regarding this situation as a threat to his life, personal
safety and freedoms.

It is important to note that Mr.
Assange has taken the decision to seek asylum and protection
of Ecuador over alleged allegations of "espionage and
treason," which "instigate fear of the possibility of
being handed over to the United States of America by
British, Swedish or Australian authorities," said Mr.
Assange, since the USA is chasing him for releasing
compromising information sensitive to the U.S. Government.
The applicant mentions that he "is a victim of persecution
in various countries, which is deduced not only from their
ideas and actions, but of his work of publishing information
which compromises the powerful, uncovers the truth and
therefore exposes corruption and abuses of human rights of
citizens around the world."

Therefore, according to the
applicant, the indictment for crimes of a political nature
is the basis for his asylum request, because in his
judgement he is facing a situation involving an imminent
danger which he cannot escape. In order to assess his fear
of possible political persecution, and that this persecution
could end up becoming a situation which curtails and
violates his rights, integrity, and could become a risk to
his personal safety and freedom, the Government of Ecuador
has considered the following:

1. Julian Assange is an
award-winning communications professional internationally
known for his struggles for freedom of expression, press
freedom and human rights in general;

2. Mr. Assange
shared privileged documents and information generated by
various sources that affected employees, countries and
organizations with a global audience;

3. That there is
strong evidence of retaliation by the country or countries
that produced the information disclosed by Mr. Assange,
retaliation that may endanger his safety, integrity, and
even his life;

4. That, despite Ecuador’s diplomatic
efforts, countries which have been asked togive adequate
safeguards for the protection and safety for the life of Mr.
Assange have refused to facilitate them;

5. That
Ecuadorian authorities are certain of the possibility that
Mr. Assange could be extradited to a third country outside
the European Union without proper guarantees for their
safety and personal integrity;

6. That legal evidence
clearly shows that, given an extradition to the United
States of America, it would be unlikely for Mr. Assange to
receive a fair trial, and likely that he would be judged by
special or military courts, where there is a high
probability of suffering cruel and degrading treatment, and
be sentenced to life imprisonment or capital punishment,
which would violate his human rights;

7. That while Mr.
Assange must answer for the investigation in Sweden, Ecuador
is aware that the Swedish prosecutor has had a contradictory
attitude that prevented Mr. Assange the full exercise of the
legitimate right of defense;

8. Ecuador is convinced that
the procedural rights of Mr. Assange have been infringed
upon during the investigation;

9. Ecuador has observed
that Mr. Assange lacks the protection and assistance that
should be received from the State of which he is a citizen;

10. That, following several public statements and
diplomatic communications by officials from Britain, Sweden
and the USA, it is inferred that these governments would not
respect international conventions and treaties, and would
give priority to domestic law, in violation of explicit
rules of universal application and,

11. That, if Mr.
Assange is remanded to custody in Sweden (as is customary in
this country), a chain of events would begin that would
prevent further protective measures from being taken to
avoid possible extradition to a third country.

Thus, the
Government of Ecuador believes that these arguments lend
support to the fears of Julian Assange, and it believes that
he may become a victim of political persecution, as a result
of his dedicated defense of freedom of expression and
freedom of press as well as his repudiation of the abuses of
power in certain countries, and that these facts suggest
that Mr. Assange could at any moment find himself in a
situation likely to endanger life, safety or personal
integrity. This fear has driven him to exercise the right to
seek and receive asylum in the Embassy of Ecuador in the UK.

Article 41 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador
clearly defines the right of asylum. Under this provision,
the rights of asylum and refugee status are fully recognized
in Ecuador in accordance with international law and
instruments of human rights. According to this
constitutional provision:

"Persons who find themselves
in a situation of asylum and refuge shall enjoy special
protection to ensure the full exercise of their rights. The
State shall respect and ensure the principle of
non-refoulement [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-refoulement],
and shall provide emergency legal and humanitarian
assistance."

Similarly, the right to asylum is
enshrined in Article 4.7 of the Foreign Service Act of 2006
(Ley Orgánica del Servicio Exterior), which
establishes the ability of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Trade and Integration of Ecuador to hear cases of diplomatic
asylum, in accordance with laws, treaties, and international
norms and laws.

It should be stressed that our country has
stood out in recent years to accommodate a large number of
people who have applied for territorial asylum or refugee
status, having unconditionally respected the principle of
non-refoulement and non-discrimination, while it has taken
steps to provide refugee status in an expeditious manner,
taking into account the circumstances of applicants, mostly
Colombians fleeing armed conflicts in their own country. The
UN High Commissioner for Refugees has praised Ecuador’s
refugee policy, and highlighted the important fact that the
country has not confined these people to camps, but has
integrated them into Ecuadorian society, with full enjoyment
of their human and natural rights.

Ecuador places the
right of asylum in the category of universal human rights
and beliefs, therefore, that the effective implementation of
this right requires international cooperation that our
countries can provide, without which it would be fruitless,
and the institution would be totally ineffective. For these
reasons, and recalling the obligation of all States to
assist in the protection and promotion of human rights as
provided by the United Nations Charter, we invite the
British Government to lend its assistance in achieving this
purpose.

To that effect, the state of Ecuador can
confirm, following analysis of the legal institutions
related to asylum, that the foundation of these rights has
set out fundamental principles of general international law,
the same as for its universal scope and importance, because
of its consistance with the general interest of the entire
international community, and full recognition by all states.
These principles, which are set forth in various
international instruments are as follows:

a) Asylum in
all its forms is a fundamental human right creating
obligations erga omnes, ie "for all" states.

b)
Diplomatic asylum, refuge (or territorial asylum), and the
right not to be extradited, expelled, delivered or
transferred, are comparable human rights, since they are
based on the same principles of human protection:
non-refoulement and non-discrimination without any adverse
distinction based on race, color, sex, language, religion or
belief, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth or other status or any other similar
criteria.

c) All these forms of protection are governed
by the principles pro person (i.e. more favorable to the
individual), equality, universality, indivisibility,
interrelatedness and interdependence.

d) The protection
occurs when the State granting asylum, required refuge, or
powers of protection, consider that there is a risk or fear
that the protected person may be a victim of political
persecution, or is charged with political offenses.

e)
The State granting asylum qualifies the causes of asylum and
extradition case, weigh the evidence.

f) No matter which
of its forms or modality, asylum always has the same cause
and lawful object, i.e. political persecution, which makes
it permissible, and to safeguard the life, personal safety
and freedom of the protected person, which is its
legitimately intended purpose.

g) The right of asylum is
a fundamental human right, therefore, belongs to jus cogens,
i.e. the system of mandatory rules of law recognized by the
international community as a whole, for which no derogation
is permitted, making null all treaties and provisions of
international law which oppose it.

i) The lack of international agreement or domestic
legislation of States cannot legitimately be invoked to
limit, impair or deny the right to asylum.

j) The rules
and principles governing the rights to asylum or refuge, no
extradition, no handing over, no expulsion and no transfer
are convergent, to the extent necessary to enhance the
protection and provide it with maximum efficiency. In this
sense, they are complementary to the international human
rights law, the right of asylum and refugee law, and
humanitarian law.

k) The rights of protection of the
human being are based on ethical principles and universally
accepted values and therefore have a humanistic, social,
solidaric, peaceful and humanitarian character.

l) All
States have a duty to promote the progressive development of
international human rights through effective national and
international action.

Ecuador has judged that the laws
applicable to the asylum case of Mr. Julian Assange comprise
the entire set of principles, standards, mechanisms and
procedures provided for international human rights
instruments (whether regional or universal), which include
among their provisions the right to seek, receive and enjoy
asylum for political reasons, the conventions governing the
right of asylum and refugee law, and which recognize the
right not to be delivered, returned, or expelled when
credible fear of political persecution exists; conventions
governing extradition law recognize the right not to be
extradited when this measure covers political persecution,
and conventions governing humanitarian law, recognize the
right not to be transferred when there is a risk of
political persecution. All these forms of asylum and
international protection are justified by the need to
protect this person from possible political persecution, or
a possible accusation of political crimes and / or crimes
related to the latter, which in the opinion of Ecuador, not
only endanger Mr. Assange, but also pose a serious injustice
committed against him.

It is undeniable that states,
having agreed to numerous and substantive international
instruments (many of them legally-binding), have the
obligation to provide protection or asylum to persons
persecuted for political reasons and have expressed their
desire to establish a legal institution to protect human
rights and fundamental freedoms based on a general practice
accepted as law, which confers on such obligations a
mandatory nature, erga omnes [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erga_omnes],
linked to the respect, protection and progressive
development of human rights and fundamental freedoms that
are part of jus cogens [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peremptory_norm].
Some of these instruments are mentioned below:

a) United
Nations Charter of 1945, Purposes and Principles of the
United Nations: the obligation of all members to cooperate
in the promotion and protection of human rights;

b)
Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948: right to seek
and enjoy asylum in any country, for political reasons
(Article 14);

c) Declaration of the Rights and Duties of
Man, 1948: right to seek and enjoy asylum for political
reasons (Article 27);

d) Geneva Convention of August 12,
1949, relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in
Time of War: the protected person should in no case be
transferred to a country where they fear persecution for his
political views ( Article 45);

e) Convention on the
Status of Refugees 1951 and Protocol of New York, 1967:
prohibits returning or expelling refugees to countries where
their lives and freedom would be threatened (Art.
33.1);

f) Convention on Diplomatic Asylum, 1954: The
State has the right to grant asylum and classify the nature
of the offense or the motives of persecution (Article
4);

g) Convention on Territorial Asylum of 1954: the
State is entitled to admit to its territory such persons as
it considers necessary (Article 1), when they are
persecuted for their beliefs, political opinions or
affiliation, or acts that may be considered political
offenses ( Article 2), the State granting asylum may not
return or expel a refugee who is persecuted for political
reasons or offenses (Article 3); also, extradition is not
appropriate when dealing with people who, according to the
requested State, be prosecuted for political crimes , or
common crimes committed for political purposes, or when
extradition is requested obeying political motives (Article
4);

h) European Convention on Extradition of 1957,
prohibits extradition if the requested Party considers that
the offense is a political charge (Article 3.1);

i) 2312
Declaration on Territorial Asylum of 1967 provides for the
granting of asylum to persons who have that right under
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
including persons struggling against colonialism (Article
1.1). It prohibits the refusal of admission, expulsion and
return to any State where he may be subject to persecution
(Article 3.1);

j) Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties of 1969, provides that the rules and principles of
general international law imperatives do not support a
contrary agreement, the treaty is void upon conflicts with
one of these rules (Article 53), and if there arises a new
peremptory norm of this nature, any existing treaty which
conflicts with that provision is void and is terminated
(Article 64). As regards the application of these Articles,
the Convention allows States to claim compliance with the
International Court of Justice, without requiring the
agreement of the respondent State, accepting the court’s
jurisdiction (Article 66.b). Human rights are norms of
jus cogens.

k) American Convention on Human Rights,
1969: right to seek and enjoy asylum for political reasons
(Article 22.7);

l) European Convention for the
Suppression of Terrorism of 1977, the requested State is
entitled to refuse extradition when there is a danger that
the person is prosecuted or punished for their political
opinions (Article 5);

m) Inter-American Convention on
Extradition of 1981, the extradition is not applicable when
the person has been tried or convicted, or is to be tried in
a court of special or ad hoc in the requesting State
(Article 4.3), when, under the classification of the
requested State, whether political crimes or related crimes
or crimes with a political aim pursued, and when, the
circumstances of the case, can be inferred that persecution
for reasons of race, religion or nationality; that the
situation of the person sought may be prejudiced for any of
these reasons (Article 4.5). Article 6 provides, in
reference to the right of asylum, that "nothing in this
Convention shall be construed as limiting the right of
asylum, when appropriate."

n) African Charter on Human
and Peoples of 1981, pursued individual’s right to seek
and obtain asylum in other countries (Article 12.3);

p)
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union 2000:
establishes the right of diplomatic and consular protection.
Every citizen of the Union shall, in the territory of a
third country not represented by the Member State of
nationality, have the protection of diplomatic and consular
authorities of any Member State, under the same conditions
as nationals of that State (Article 46).

The Government of
Ecuador believes it is important to note that the rules and
principles recognized in the international instruments
mentioned above and in other multilateral agreements take
precedence over domestic law of States, because these
treaties are based on universal rules guided by intangible
principles, whereof deriving greater respect, protection and
fulfillment of human rights against unilateral attitudes of
such States. This would compromise international law, which
should instead be strengthened in order to consolidate the
respect of fundamental rights in terms of integration and
ecumenical character.

Furthermore, since Assange applied
for asylum in Ecuador, we have maintained high-level
diplomatic talks with the United Kingdom, Sweden and the
United States.

In the course of these conversations, our
country has sought to obtain strict guarantees from the UK
government that Assange would face, without hindrance, an
open legal process in Sweden. These safeguards include that
after facing his legal responsibilities in Sweden, that he
would not be extradited to a third country; that is,
ensuring that the Specialty Rule [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmstand/d/st030114/am/30114s01.htm]
is not waived. Unfortunately, despite repeated exchanges of
messages, the UK at no time showed signs of wanting to reach
a political compromise, and merely repeated the content of
legal texts.

Assange’s lawyers invited Swedish
authorities to take Assange statements in the premises of
the Embassy of Ecuador in London. Ecuador officially
conveyed to Swedish authorities its willingness to host this
interview without interference or impediment to the legal
processes followed in Sweden. This measure is absolutely
legally possible. Sweden did not accept.

On the other
hand, Ecuador raised the possibility that the Swedish
government establish guarantees to not subsequently
extradite Assange to the United States. Again, the Swedish
government rejected any compromise in this regard.

Finally, Ecuador wrote to the U.S. government to
officially reveal its position on Assange’s case.
Inquiries related to the following:

1. If there is an
ongoing legal process or intent to carry out such processes
against Julian Assange and/or the founders of the WikiLeaks
organization;

2. Should the above be true, then under what
kind of legislation, and how and under what conditions would
such persons be subject to under maximum
penalties;

3. Whether there is an intention to request the
extradition of Julian Assange to the United States.

The
U.S. response has been that it cannot provide information
about the Assange case, claiming that it is a bilateral
matter between Ecuador and the United Kingdom.

With this
background, the Government of Ecuador, true to its tradition
of protecting those who seek refuge in its territory or on
the premises of its diplomatic missions, has decided to
grant diplomatic asylum to Mr. Assange, based on the
application submitted to the President of the Republic,
transmitted in writing in London, dated June 19, 2012, and
supplemented by letter written in London dated June 25,
2012, for which the Government of Ecuador, after a fair and
objective assessment of the situation described by Mr.
Assange, according to his own words and arguments, endorsed
the fears of the appellant, and accepts that there are
indications which lead to the conclusion that he may face
political persecution, or that such persecution could occur
if timely and necessary measures are not taken to avoid it.

The Government of Ecuador is certain that the British
Government knows how to assess the justice and righteousness
of the Ecuadorian position, and consistent with these
arguments, it is confident that the UK will offer safe
passage guarantees necessary and relevant to the asylum, so
that their governments can honor with action the fidelity
owed to law and international institutions that both nations
have helped shape along their common history.

It also
hopes to maintain unchanged the excellent ties of friendship
and mutual respect which bind Ecuador and the United Kingdom
and their people, as they are also engaged in promoting and
defending the same principles and values, and because they
share similar concerns about democracy, peace, and well
being, which are only possible if the fundamental rights of
everyone are
respected.

Uruknet receives daily many hacking attempts. To prevent this, we have 10 websites on 6 servers in different places.
So, if the website is slow or it does not answer, you can recall one of the other web sites: www.uruknet.info www.uruknet.de www.uruknet.biz www.uruknet.org.uk www.uruknet.com www.uruknet.org - www.uruknet.it www.uruknet.eu www.uruknet.net www.uruknet.web.at.it

:: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.
We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own
that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
:: We always mention the author and link the original site and page of every article.